The wrong way up
 

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 1 Sep 2004 23:34:07 +0100, Grebbsy McLaren
wrote:


What if the Underground covered all the area south of the Thames and
only a little bit of the north bank, instead of vice versa?

http://www.colourcountry.net/images/...derground.html


that's rather clever.

I shall have to print some copies off at work and see if anyone notices
the difference :-)


It just shows how cispontine our underground system is (speaking as
someone from north of the river).
SR

The wrong way up
 

In article ,
Stephen Richards wrote:

It just shows how cispontine our underground system is (speaking as
someone from north of the river).

But the reason for this is not some anti-sarf London bias by London
underground companies but because the geology makes it very difficult
to build tunnels there.

--
http://www.election.demon.co.uk
"The guilty party was the Liberal Democrats and they were hardened offenders,
and coded racism was again in evidence in leaflets distributed in September
1993." - Nigel Copsey, "Contemporary British Fascism", page 62.

The wrong way up
 

Almost made no difference to the Silverlink Metro - still starts at (almost)
Silvertown and goes East.
--
Ian Tindale

The wrong way up
 

David Boothroyd wrote:
In article ,
Stephen Richards wrote:

It just shows how cispontine our underground system is (speaking as
someone from north of the river).

But the reason for this is not some anti-sarf London bias by London
underground companies but because the geology makes it very difficult
to build tunnels there.

And the main line companies wanted to keep it for themselves.

The wrong way up
 

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Piccadilly Pilot wrote:

David Boothroyd wrote:

In article ,
Stephen Richards wrote:

It just shows how cispontine our underground system is (speaking as
someone from north of the river).

But the reason for this is not some anti-sarf London bias by London
underground companies but because the geology makes it very difficult
to build tunnels there.

And the main line companies wanted to keep it for themselves.

The way i heard it, Southern's suburban rail services were so good that LT
didn't feel that south London needed tubes as well - the north presumably
had crappy rail services. A similar mechanism might also explain the lack
of tubes in Hackney, although there, i prefer to think it's blatant bias
by westerners against the oppressed masses of that borough.

tom

--
Mathematics is the door and the key to the sciences. -- Roger Bacon

The wrong way up
 

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004 22:20:06 +0100, Tom Anderson
wrote:

On Thu, 2 Sep 2004, Piccadilly Pilot wrote:



And the main line companies wanted to keep it for themselves.

The way i heard it, Southern's suburban rail services were so good that LT
didn't feel that south London needed tubes as well - the north presumably
had crappy rail services.




tom

Was there not some sort of Truce between LT and the Southern after
various proposals were put foward . Called the Morden Agreement.
Southern dropped objection of Northern Line to Morden providing it
stopped there and LT gave up pre WW1 ideas of getting District trains
to what now seem unlikely destinations over what had become Southern
tracks .Sutton ? Leatherhead?
Have to go digging amongst some books now .

G.Harman

The wrong way up
 

Grebbsy McLaren wrote in
:

What if the Underground covered all the area south of the Thames and
only a little bit of the north bank, instead of vice versa?

http://www.colourcountry.net/images/...derground.html

Somehow I feel that Sydenham Hill doesnt have the same ring as Mornington
Crescent.

The wrong way up
 

Ian Tindale wrote:

Almost made no difference to the Silverlink Metro - still starts at
(almost) Silvertown and goes East.

In fact the same is true of the other end of the Silverlink Metro - both the
start and end points are nearly where they already are right now, more or
less.
--
Ian Tindale

The wrong way up
 

"Ian Tindale" wrote in message
...
Ian Tindale wrote:

Almost made no difference to the Silverlink Metro -
still starts at (almost) Silvertown and goes East.

In fact the same is true of the other end of the Silverlink
Metro - both the start and end points are nearly where
they already are right now, more or less.

And the first stops away from each end are exactly where they are now.

Big thanks to Grebbsy for bringing this to our attention!

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

The wrong way up
 

WOW! So many stops in my area!

Unfortunately, it doesn't seem to help my journey to work in Docklands!

Regards,
Nes.

--
Please remove the spam-deflecting X's to reply directly to me - or simply
reply to the group!
--


"Grebbsy McLaren" wrote in message
...
What if the Underground covered all the area south of the Thames and
only a little bit of the north bank, instead of vice versa?

http://www.colourcountry.net/images/...derground.html

Someone had too much time on their hands, but I take my hat off to them
nevertheless.

Grebbsy
--
"All vampires suck, but not all who suck are vampires."
(--B.J.Kuehl)

:::Grebbsy :::::::lemon curry?:::